Background and Aim Gastrointestinal manifestations of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic may mimic irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and social distancing measures may affect IBS patients negatively. We aimed to study the impact of COVID‐19 on respondents with self‐reported IBS. Methods We conducted an anonymized survey from May to June 2020 in 33 countries. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices on personal hygiene and social distancing as well as psychological impact of COVID‐19 were assessed. Statistical analysis was performed to determine differences in well‐being and compliance to social distancing measures between respondents with and without self‐reported IBS. Factors associated with improvement or worsening of IBS symptoms were evaluated. Results Out of 2704 respondents, 2024 (74.9%) did not have IBS, 305 (11.3%) had self‐reported IBS, and 374 (13.8%) did not know what IBS was. Self‐reported IBS respondents reported significantly worse emotional, social, and psychological well‐being compared with non‐IBS respondents and were less compliant to social distancing measures (28.2% vs 35.3%, P = 0.029); 61.6% reported no change, 26.6% reported improvement, and 11.8% reported worsening IBS symptoms. Higher proportion of respondents with no change in IBS symptoms were willing to practice social distancing indefinitely versus those who deteriorated (74.9% vs 51.4%, P = 0.016). In multivariate analysis, willingness to continue social distancing for another 2–3 weeks ( vs longer period) was significantly associated with higher odds of worsening IBS. Conclusion Our study showed that self‐reported IBS respondents had worse well‐being and compliance to social distancing measures than non‐IBS respondents. Future research will focus on occupational stress and dietary changes during COVID‐19 that may influence IBS.

Algorithm performance varied with different case definitions of DILI attributed to different laboratory threshold criteria, diagnosis codes, and study drugs.

Background/Aims Adverse early life experiences are associated with the development of stroke, cancer, diabetes, and chronic respiratory and ischemic heart diseases. These negative experiences may also play a role in the development of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)-a functional gastrointestinal disease. This review discusses the research to date on the parental, perinatal, and childhood risk and protective factors associated with the development of IBS. Methods A literature search was completed for studies published between 1966 and 2018 that investigated premorbid factors occurring during the perinatal and childhood periods as well as parental factors that were associated with the development of IBS. Results Twenty-seven studies fulfilled the review criteria. Risk factors that appeared in more than one study included: (1) parental IBS, substance abuse, parental punishment, and rejection as parental risk factors; (2) low birth weight as a perinatal risk factor; and (3) crowded living conditions in low-income families, childhood anxiety, depression, or child abuse as childhood risk factors. Protective factors for IBS were emotional warmth from the parents and being born to an older mother. Conclusions More effort is needed to identify what fetal and maternal factors are associated with low birth weight and IBS. A well-executed prospective birth cohort with a collection of bio-samples and functional data will provide a better understanding of how adversity and the interplay between genetics, epigenetics, and numerous risk factors affect the development of IBS.

Drug induced liver injury (DILI) may be different in the East compared to the West due to differing disease prevalence, prescribing patterns and pharmacogenetic profiles. To review existing literature on causative agents of DILI in the East compared to the West, a comprehensive literature search was performed on electronic databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure without language restrictions. Studies which involve patients having DILI and reported the frequency of causative agents were included. A random effects model was applied to synthesize the current evidence using prevalence of class-specific and agent-specific causative drugs with 95% confidence intervals. Of 6,914 articles found, 12 showed the distribution of drugs implicated in DILI in the East with a total of 33,294 patients and 16 in the West with a total of 26,069 DILI cases. In the East, the most common agents by class were anti-tuberculosis drugs (26.6%), herbal and alternative medications (25.3%), and antibiotics (15.7%), while in the West, antibiotics (34.9%), cardiovascular agents (17.3%), and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (12.5%) were the commonest. For individual agents, the most common agents in the East were isoniazid-rifampicin-pyrazinamide (25.4%), phenytoin (3.5%), and cephalosporin (2.9%) while in the West, amoxicillin-potassium clavulanate combination acid (11.3%), nimesulide (6.3%), and ibuprofen (6.1%) were the commonest. There was significant heterogeneity due to variability in single-centre compared to multi-centre studies. Differences in DILI in the East versus the West both in drug classes and individual agents are important for clinicians to recognize.